Which of the two candidates do you favor (or hate least)?

Since this somehow doesn't have a thread and the first of the official debates just ended, would anyone care to share their thoughts on this years presidential race?

I'm sure most of you will agree with me that this is, yet again, a choice between the lesser of two evils; this is only made more apparent by the excessive mud-slinging which NEITHER of them will take responsibility for (go figure). I'm also sure most of you can guess that I'll be voting for Romney this year but even though he's far from my first pick as president, I've actually become quite fond of his VP pick, Ryan.

If a Rich man has a choice between cutting taxes for the rich to give himself more money or helping out the less fortunate and taxing the rich to help the poor, he will choose to make his own bank account larger every time.

I do not trust a rich man to run a country, they are far to invested in their own wallet and their own interest to help the little man out over themselves. Not the kind of man you want looking out for you.

I'm not sure if you've noticed, but everyone in Washington is rich. Both have said they are against lowering taxes on the rich, though. They're also both trying to limit tax exemptions and simplify the tax base to prevent tax evasion.

Everyone: "can we please see this plan so you aren't just spouting good words about how you are going to fix it without anyone being able to dispute your claims since you haven't shown facts about it?"

He said in the debate that he doesn't want to disclose the details of any plan because he wants to sit down with congressional leaders before trying to push something through congress. He has mentioned a number of core ideas he would like to implement, though.

He can still give out his current plan and say it is open to be changed on points but going into a debate against a man who's plan has been in place for 4 years and has shown exactly what he will do for the next four years and then asked about what his plan is says "nuh uh, you can't see it yet. it's not ready. But here is why YOUR'S sucks and here is what the part I haven't shown you says" is just a shit way to debate.

The only plan Romney hasn't released all the details on is the healthcare plan, but how could it possibly be worse than what we have now?

And if he had a full bill for you to read right now, would you? No, the only people who would read it would be his opposition so they can nit-pick at parts which are irrelevant. It makes no sense for Romney to paint a target on his back for a few details that aren't important to his goals. He said he is going to meet with congressional leaders to hammer out a genuine, quality bill and that's exactly what I want.

I don't want a 2000-page abomination which nobody read, infringes on states rights, and was passed without a single vote from the opposing ideology. Especially one that increases taxes and substantially increases the influence of the federal government.

We need a carefully designed plan which everyone can agree on and the best way to do that is to come to the table with important goals and idea, not the party-line garbage we've been getting so far.

Also, I intended to leave the poll with only Romney an Obama... but I guess we can throw up some third party candidates if someone is actually vote for them.

Mitt Romney is a very, very rich white guy who only cares about other very, very rich white guys. Literally. He only cares about affluent Caucasian males. He also has a reputation for not being able to make up his fucking mind, doesn't he?

Of all the things you could call Romney, I hardly think "racist" is one of them. And like I said before, they're all rich. At least Romney made most of his money from business rather than politics and inheritance.

Gauz wrote:Mitt Romney is a very, very rich white guy who only cares about other very, very rich white guys. Literally. He only cares about affluent Caucasian males.

Ignoring the fact that by reducing the investment tax, people are more likely to invest, which not only promotes more jobs, but also results in higher federal revenue, right?

Gauz wrote:Dirty business if what is said about him is true.

I hope we're not talking about the tax thing, because that's really dumb. Almost all of Romney's earnings come from long-term investment, which has a lower rate than income tax.

Gauz wrote:He also apparently thinks spending MORE (trillions more) on defense is a good idea.

Can you link a source? I can't find anyone who even gives a ballpark estimate of Romney's plans to increase defense spending.

Lord Pheonix wrote:Well he is a Rich White Republican Mormon who grew in the sixties and said that "at least no ones asked me about MY birth certificate" when talking about Obama. That is the ingredients for a racist.

You mean in reference to the hullabaloo both sides made about one another's birth certificates last election? Because as I recall, there was a lot of rabble rabble about McCain being born in Panama back when we still owned the Panama canal, and last I checked, McCain is a rich white Republican Christian who grew up in the sixties.

McCain said border-crossers have set fires "because they want to signal others. They set fires to keep warm and they have set fires in order to divert law enforcement agents and agencies from them. The answer to that part of the problem is to get a secure border."

I just saw "wildfire" and thought "California Wild Fire" as it's heard a lot more often, but my point remains.

The study came out AFTER he made his claims. He was just spouting off about illegal immigrants causing fires with no back up information and then a study came out later that said it's suspected to happen sometimes maybe.

Also said that some campers had started a fire on accident. And a good portion of fires are started by cigarettes. We should outlaw camping and building fires along with making cigarettes illegal.

But no, 30 fires over 4 years that were all suspected but never shown to be done by immigrants enforces a call on stricter border control.

What about Mitt Romney browning himself up to try to appeal to Latino's? That shit's cool. Oh no wait, i'm totally sure he just happened to want to get a tan right before his speech despite never appearing to ever having had one before.

How about those tax cuts to the middle class he promised? Wait did you say he's going to give those to the rich and tax the middle class more? =O Did NOT see that coming.

UPDATE: Oh my bad, Romney changed his plan again on the debate last night..."He has proposed making the Bush tax cuts permanent for all income levels -- then cutting all rates by an additional 20 percent. He would also repeal the alternative minimum tax and permanently repeal the estate tax."

Well say all the shit you want on Romney, but his VP candidate is top notch just look at this quote..."Seventy percent of Americans want the American dream. They believe in the American idea. Only 30 percent want the welfare state," Ryan said. "Before too long, we could become a society where the net majority of Americans are takers, not makers." YEAH! Fuck those 30% of Americans! They all WANT to be poor its their CHOICE. They most definitely want that over being well off im sure.souce: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/02/paul-ryan-30-percent-welfare-state_n_1933730.html